Service Delete

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description does not contradict the annotations and the destructive nature is reflected by destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. However, it adds no extra behavioral context beyond the schema and annotations, such as permanence, cascading effects, or failure behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's action and target.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter destructive delete operation with full schema coverage and a provided output schema, the description is complete. The annotations cover destructive and idempotence traits, and nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single parameter service_id is already documented as an integer. The description only restates the selection mechanism ('by service ID') rather than adding meaning such as where to find the ID or how it is validated.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a service from LibreNMS by service ID.' It clearly identifies the action and distinguishes this from sibling tools like service_add and service_edit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The intended use is implied by the action verb: call this when deleting a service. However, the description does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., service_edit for modifications, service_add for creation) or state when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.